Gerhardt v. C.K.
, 2008 ND 136,
A proceeding to adjudicate parentage commenced before the effective date of the 2005 version of the Uniform Parentage Act is governed by the law in effect at the time the proceeding was commenced.
Section 14-17-10(1), N.D.C.C. (1993), does not require the court to compel genetic tests in response to a post-judgment motion.
L.C.V. v. D.E.G.
, 2005 ND 180,
705 N.W.2d 257
The trial court cannot delegate to a custody investigator its authority to award custody to the parent who will promote the best interest and welfare of the child, and it is within the trial court's discretion to assign the weight given to a custody
investigator's recommendations.
The trial court's choice for custody between two fit parents is a difficult one, and the appellate court will not retry the case or substitute its judgment for that of the trial court when the decision is supported by the evidence.
Attorney fees are not allowed to a successful litigant in a custody and support proceeding unless expressly authorized by statute or agreement.
M.S.B. v. J.M.B.
, 2005 ND 161,
704 N.W.2d 573
Judgment establishing physical custody of a minor child is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).
Rolette Co. Social Service Bd. v. B.E.
, 2005 ND 101,
697 N.W.2d 333
A dismissal of an action without prejudice may be final and appealable if it has the practical effect of terminating the litigation in the plaintiff's chosen forum.
The state courts have concurrent subject-matter jurisdiction with the tribal courts to determine a support obligation against an enrolled Indian where parentage is not at issue and the parent against whom support is sought is not residing on the
Indian reservation.
R.R. v. G. H.
, 2004 ND 197,
690 N.W.2d 429
Visitation order is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).
T.E.J. v. T.S.
, 2004 ND 120,
681 N.W.2d 444
The court may impute income to determine an obligor's future support obligation when the obligor has made a voluntary change in employment.
A court must grant such rights of visitation as will enable the non-custodial parent and child to maintain a parent-child relationship, and the court may restrict or deny this right only if visitation is likely to endanger the child's physical or
emotional health.
K.L.B. v. S.B.
, 2003 ND 88,
662 N.W.2d 277
The court can vacate a default judgment when circumstances justify it under a properly raised motion for relief from the judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b).
Under N.D.C.C. 14-17-10 the district court is required to order genetic tests only if the request for tests is made when proceedings are pending to adjudicate parentage under the chapter.
J.B. v. M.R.
, 2002 ND 157,
655 N.W.2d 84
Custody judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).
Roe v. Doe
, 2002 ND 136,
649 N.W.2d 566
Under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(iv), the burden is on the moving party to show sufficient grounds exist for disturbing the finality of a judgment.
A judgment entered without subject matter jurisdiction is void.
State courts may not exercise jurisdiction over a paternity and support action if state court jurisdiction would infringe on an Indian tribe's right to govern itself.
In general, tribal courts do not have exclusive jurisdiction over claims against tribal defendants that arise outside of the reservation.
To vacate a state court judgment on the paternity of an Indian child, the moving party must show that the state court lacked jurisdiction as a matter of law.
McKenzie Co. Social Service Bd. v. C.G.
, 2001 ND 151,
633 N.W.2d 157
A judgment entered without personal or subject matter jurisdiction is void.
Determining the parentage of a child of Indian tribal members is intimately connected with the right of reservation Indians to make their own laws and be ruled by them.
Affirmative relief is not available under N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(iv).
K.L.G v. S.L.N.
, 2001 ND 33,
622 N.W.2d 232
Upon request of the noncustodial parent, a court shall grant visitation that will enable the child and the noncustodial parent to maintain a parent-child relationship beneficial to the child.
Visitation between a child and a noncustodial parent is not merely a privilege of the noncustodial parent, but a right of the child.
Visitation with the noncustodial parent is presumed to be in the child's best interests.
A visitation schedule which provides less frequent, but extended, visitation periods will preserve a noncustodial parent's ability to foster and develop a relationship with the child.
Interest of S.J.F.
, 2000 ND 158,
615 N.W.2d 533
Interpretation of a judgment is a question of law, and a judgment should be construed to give effect to each and every part of it.
Once an appellate court has finally determined a legal question and remanded the cause for further proceedings, its decision becomes the law of the case and will not be differently decided on a subsequent appeal in the same case.
The determination of back child support in a paternity action lies within the trial court's discretion, and its decision will be reversed on appeal only for an abuse of discretion.
Interest of N.C.C.
, 2000 ND 129,
612 N.W.2d 561
To change custody after the two-year period following a custody order, the district court must determine a material change in the circumstances of the child or the parties has occurred since the custody order and modification is necessary to serve
the child's best interests.
A district court's findings on a motion to change custody will not be reversed unless they are clearly erroneous.
State ex rel. D.D. v. G.K.
, 2000 ND 101,
611 N.W.2d 179
The more rigorous requirements of N.D.C.C. 14-09-06.6(1)-(5) apply when a motion to modify custody is brought or made within two years of a custody determination.
Interest of S.R.A.
, 2000 ND 46,
607 N.W.2d 575
In a paternity action, if the alleged father fails to appear for or refuses to submit to genetic testing, the court may direct entry of a judgment by default.
Interest of K.M.G.
, 2000 ND 50,
607 N.W.2d 248
A custody order cannot be modified for two years after entry unless the court finds: (a) a persistent and willful denial or interference with visitation; (b) the child's present environment may endanger the child's physical or emotional health or
impair the child's emotional development; or (c) the primary physical care of the child has changed to the other parent for longer than six months, and the modification is necessary to serve the best interest of the child.
Interest of C.J.C.
, 2000 ND 27,
606 N.W.2d 117
The Uniform Parentage Act impliedly grants trial courts the power to change a minor child's surname if in the child's best interests.
On appeal, the appellant assumes the consequences and the risk of failure to file a transcript.
An interim order appointing a guardian ad litem is not a final judgment, and is subject to change at any time prior to entry of a final judgment.
Cost taxation is within the trial court's discretion and will not be disturbed on appeal unless it is affirmatively established the trial court abused its discretion.
Botnen v. Lukens
, 1998 ND 224,
587 N.W.2d 141
Whenever specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact in understanding the evidence or determining a fact in issue, expert testimony is admissible.
An award of custody of a child to grandparents, rather than to one or both of the child's natural parents, is clearly erroneous unless exceptional circumstances require such a custody disposition in the best interests of the child.
An alternating custody arrangement requires a factual finding it is in the child's best interest.
Interest of S.J.F.
, 1998 ND App 4,
582 N.W.2d 382
A statement that evidence is insufficient is not a finding of
fact made from the evidence, but is a general assessment or
evaluation of the evidence.
A trial court can order genetic testing in a paternity action
without a request from either party.
Matter of B.E.M.
, 1997 ND 134,
566 N.W.2d 414
Under the four-step analysis adopted in Stout v. Stout, 1997 ND
61, 561 N.W.2d 903, the trial court's decision to grant mother's
motion to remove child from the state was not clearly erroneous.
Interest of E.H.
, 1997 ND 101,
564 N.W.2d 281
In a paternity action, the trial court erred in using income
averaging, rather than the obligor's actual annual net income, to
determine child support arrears.
T. S. v. J. L.
,
562 N.W.2d 104 (N.D. 1996)
Child support order summarily affirmed under
N.D.R.App.P. 35.1
P.E. v. W.C.
,
552 N.W.2d 375 (N.D. 1996)
Under Section 14-17-05(1)(b), N.D.C.C., a man alleged
to be the father of a child may not raise the five year
statute of limitations to shield his potential parental
obligations or to preclude a presumed father by marital
relationship from rebutting the presumption of paternity in
Section 14-17-04(1)(a), N.D.C.C. A demand for a jury trial
in an amended pleading which raises the same general factual
issue as the initial pleading is not timely.
Gerhardt v. E.C.
,
546 N.W.2d 359 (N.D. 1996)
M.L.M. v. L.P.M.
,
529 N.W.2d 184 (N.D. 1995)
Interest of K.E.N. v. R. C.
,
513 N.W.2d 892 (N.D. 1994)
B.H. v. K.D.
,
506 N.W.2d 368 (N.D. 1993)
Bernhardt v. K.R.S.
,
503 N.W.2d 233 (N.D. 1993)
State of Minnesota v. Snell
,
493 N.W.2d 656 (N.D. 1992)
McKenzie County Social Services Board v. V.G.
,
392 N.W.2d 399 (N.D. 1986)
S.M.B. v. G.G.
,
376 N.W.2d 27 (N.D. 1985)
Quirk v. Swanson
,
368 N.W.2d 557 (N.D. 1985)
Williams County Social Services Board v. Falcon
,
367 N.W.2d 170 (N.D. 1985)
Gerhardt v. D.L.K.
,
327 N.W.2d 113 (N.D. 1982)
Hadland v. Schroeder
,
326 N.W.2d 709 (N.D. 1982)
D.M., ex rel. Ohlsen v. W.J.S.
,
315 N.W.2d 683 (N.D. 1982)
Throndset v. J.R.
,
302 N.W.2d 769 (N.D. 1981)
C.B.D. v. W.E.B.
,
298 N.W.2d 493 (N.D. 1980)
Interest of W.M.V.
,
268 N.W.2d 781 (N.D. 1978)
State v. Jacobson
,
156 N.W.2d 70 (N.D. 1968)